Intelligence is a key component that is required in our day to day lives as it helps us to reason and thus understand and comprehend difficult issues, effectively fit into different environmental settings and learn from previous experiences to efficiently tackle obstacles that we may face. The same concept has been used by government agencies and civilians to get information about the world around them which enable them to formulate rational decisions regarding their relationship with foreign countries and thus effectively plan for any aspect that poses a threat to the welfare and development of their country.
The formulation of an intelligent body is also cost effective because providing each governmental federal unit with satellite reconnaissance is extremely expensive. In an attempt of guarding the interests of US in relation to US safety, defense, law and policy making legislations the government body has relied on intelligent bodies since US became a republic though the bodies were not a provision in the US constitution (Prados, 2006).
In 1941 US Pearl Harbor was attacked by the Japanese in an attempt of neutralizing the effect of the US Pacific fleet to enable the Japanese to access Malaya and Dutch East Indies and thus collect oil and rubber. This attack came as a wakening call to the lapse in enforcement of security by the US government and military agents which led to the formation of an intelligence community. The intelligence community was established in 1947 when the National security Act was enacted.
It comprised executive branch agencies that work together or separately to gather information concerning US national security and foreign relations enabling the country to modify its protection schemes thus maintaining security and safety to the US citizens and the welfare of the country. Precisely the intelligence community collects and access information that will help the government body to perform its duties and carry out its responsibilities in regards to international terrorism and narcotic activities for example hostility geared towards US by other foreign powers.
Most of the collected information is not released to the general public as it is perceived to be top governmental conflict secret weapon (Prados, 2006). The 21st century introduced new demands because of globalization which also demanded the creation of an intelligent community that was well suited in performing its functions to offer relevant information that can be used by the US government body to incorporate the changes into their security enhancement mechanisms.
John Prados in his book entitled safe for democracy: the secret wars of the CIA (2006), provides aired arguments that supported the initiative of establishment of a new intelligent community in respect to the instability of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) body discussing the wrangles that had occurred between the CIA, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other security agencies which led to the lapse in the protection and maintenance of the national security of US for instance the 9/11 bomb attack on the twin towers.
Prados also presents arguments against this initiative because CIA has played its role as a member of the intelligence community in the past successful helping US to maintain its national security and win most of the conflicts that have ensued between the country and foreign bodies (Prados, 2006). Critics that supported the initiative argued on the fact that there was an intelligence failure which incapacitated the ability of the governmental body in protecting and maintaining the national security of US by allowing terrorist to attack the country without the governmental body’s knowledge.
The failure was related to the poor management doctrine that controlled the operations of the intelligent community. Therefore, it was proposed that all intelligent community agencies were to have similar management principles that would provide them with one type of management doctrine thereby having a common conceptualization on the concept of intelligent processes. Most of these critics argued that the intelligence management team should be bureaucratic a fact that could only be achieved by separating the Director of Central Intelligent (DCI) from the CIA body.
According to the critics the director would thus be able to effectively manage, collect and access information efficiently thereby improving the integrity of the intelligent community because overlap of authority and time wastage would be reduced. This is because the involved intelligent community stakeholders would be having common objectives and principles (Prados, 2006). Those against the initiative argued that changing the intelligence community would distort the status quo a fact that is depicted by the failure of proposed reforms in an attempt of modifying the structure and functions of the intelligent community.
This group of individuals argued that the only change that the intelligent community required was internal changes geared towards making the intelligent community compliant with the advanced technology. According to the critics this would increase efficiency in providing useful information to the US governmental body thereby efficiently curbing vices impeding the country’s national security such as terrorism.
This group of individuals opposed the opinion of separating the DCI from the CIA arguing that the flow of information between the stakeholders of the intelligent community would be affected because the importance of the CIA would be ignored especially by the FBI and the other agencies that have fought over the years to override the functions of the CIA. Furthermore, the group argued that creation of a new bureaucratic group would be time consuming and a waste of the country’s important resources such as capital thus creating a lapse in the protection and maintenance of the US national security (Prados, 2006).
The rise in this argument was attributed to the problems and structural aspects that were incapacitating the role played by the intelligent community. This demise had affected the capability of the US governmental body to preserve and protect the national security heritage of its country during the Cold war for example the US governmental body failed to detect the Soviet Union acquisition of the atomic bomb, the Arab oil embargo and the invasion of Saddam Hussein in Kuwait among others. The failure was mostly contributed by the CIA body which was politically influenced.
For instance the USSR and China political leaders were able to control and manipulate functions of some of the CIA agents for example Aldrich Almes and his wife who acted as their spies. Moreover, the FBI was not notified on the discrepancy of Almes and his wife a fact that helped the collaboration of the CIA agents in the breach of US national security and failure. Furthermore, the CIA used the country’ capital resources which were scarce at the moment to build a CIA headquarter in Virginia that was worth more than $300 million dollars without the consent of other members of the intelligent community and the governmental body (Prados, 2006).
The CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA) senior officials were in constant power wrangles that curbed their cooperation and efficiency in performing their designated duties for instance when the CIA deliberately refused to indulge the NSA in their tunnel operations which occurred between the year 1954 and 1956. The CIA also planned invasions without the knowledge of the US military which severely crumbled creating loopholes in the national security maintenance for instance the attack CIA planned on Cuba in 1961.
This resulted to the increased efforts of the DIA to gain control over the intelligent body in an attempt of overruling the functions of the CIA in the 1970’s. This power control wrangle prevented the US governmental body from noticing the collapse of the Soviet political power enhanced by the failure of the Soviet political economy because US continued to spend an irrelevant huge amount of money formulating effective defense mechanisms against USSR. This fact led to the economic downfall that US faced during the Great economic recession (Prados, 2006).